Well Silvia I´m glad they´ve given you a ticket to go another day you won´t regret it. I liked the play it was entertaining funny and the text is, of course superbbbbbbbbbbbbbb. There is always some sentence some situation something that stays, something that makes it worth it something that lasts forever. That is Shakespeare, maybe you don´t expect it, maybe it is not the best comedy but there is always something for your future life, an idea, an advice, a character, whatever that makes it worth it.The way they did it was interesting the comicity was fine, sometimes they overdid it, in my opinion, for example in the final scene with the Duke making fun of everything, but on the whole I liked and enjoyed it. Some of the actors were so and so for example I didn´t like Isabel or even the Duke that much, Claudio was not bad at all or his wife in both her roles. On the whole the actors in this profussion of roles did quite well because it must have been very stressing to change the role so many times and so quickly in that they were quite good.I think the director is not very sure about what a Puritan is and he decided to portray the Catholic type which was a pity, but on the whole I think we´ve seen one of the best this year. What do you think?

I liked the play, mostly when it seemed to be focused on the original text. Especially did I enjoy the time Angelo endeavours to turn away from temptation even though he is aware that there is no succeeding in such a merchandise, noticing some similarities between such an speech and Hamlet’s “to be or not to be”. It was also very interesting his confession of love to Isabel and how sacrifice is always difficult to accept despite the fact that you think yourself right to avoid it. What about punishment? What is better: to let people at liberty to act as they please in a society where everything is respected or to put limits and rules so as to prevent “chaos”? Since, were every thing to be considered “legal”, we would be unable to distinguish between values and vices, wouldn't we?

I agree with you Marta, on the whole the play was quite good but Isabel, one of the main character, didn't play with the intensity her role required, and the Duke seemed overacted at certain times of the play. But it's worth watching and enjoying it!!Quotes that I liked and I could remember: "Todo lo difícil es fácil si es conocido" and "La virtud es atrevida y la bondad temerosa"

In general I liked the play and I agree with Marta. However I’ disliked some things and I’ like to speak about them. Firstly, I am a Catholic and I felt quite furious by the use they did of my religion. There is always the same, Spanish actors and directors are mostly left side and they spent most of their time ridiculing me, people like me and my believes. I wonder whether they would have done the same with Islam. Of course not, first because they wouldn’t dare and second because is not politically correct. But to go picking a fight with Catholic Church not only is politically correct, it is also in fashion. Sorry, I’m fed up with this stupid stuff, Catholic people are not like that, we don’t use hair shirts or anything similar, and, if someone uses it, I suppose it must be a very sacred thing for him and I don’t think anyone should have the right of making fun at it. Please lallow people from Seville to celebrate their procession in peace, for them they are something really important, not at all a funny thing.Secondly, I gave birth five times, I don’t like seeing to broke waters. In my opinion this is not an spectacle, much less one to be behold in the stage. All of we knew she was giving birth without such a disagreeable display. Third, Unfortunately I’ve seen throughout my life a lot of exhibitionist masturbating. I hate it, yesterday I hated it too, for me, it was disgusting.I short: What would have Shakespeare thought last evening watching these last two things I mention? He was a master; he didn’t need such vulgar things to convey his massage.

As usual, Shakespeare´s plays give you the key of life. It is admirable to see how he describes each character according to some virtues and vices and also his capacity of expressing it, so nice! However, there are handicaps, as Irene Visedo had yesterday, an actress who was incapable of changing her face, very forced and uncredible in her performance. She has to assimilate her text, because in my opinion she doesn´t rise to the occasion.I also liked those quotes, Natalia. I was the whole play trying to pick up some sentences, but my capacity of memory is diminishing more and more!!

I not having read the play before, the beginning of the plot resulted, for me, a little confusing, with all those fast changes, movements, and all the actors in stage. During a great time I was wondering about the brilliant, spotless, patent leather shoe, dancing alone over the pavement… In spite of all this, when I concentrated on the action, I enjoyed very much: Angelo’s performance was very interesting and expressive, but in the other hand The Duke, perhaps, should need more strength and vivacity, and Isabel didn’t convince me at all, she looked very static, nearly nailed into the ground and sometimes inexpressive.I agree with Marta, Shakespeare always gives you, at least, a sentence to think about and reflect. Yesterday, I took this: “ La piedad puede ser anuncio de una mayor desgracia”.Finally I agree, too, with Paloma. We needn’t those disgusting, little spectacles of sexual connotations to understand the very meaning of the lines.

Thank you Marta, I was very lucky to find such a kind person in the theatre to mend my fault.And we were not the only ones having problems!!!It has been worth!!! I liked it very much!

As Roberto I also find some resemblances between Angelo and Hamlet, but they vanish quickly;Angelo hesitates amongst being honest and honourable and his natural man condition (which is not exactly Hamlet’s doubt) but he decides it in a very sudden way!

I think those exaggerating scenes such as the one of the delivery and masturbation, had to stand out to make obvious and remarkable some events among all the mess of the changing characters.

As to the acting…What I liked worst was Isabel movements, not only her speech, but her way of walking or gestures, she seemed a spoilt girl throwing a tantrum(con una rabieta)more than a nun with such a responsibility behind her.

I hardly tried to understand all the quotes but I have to admit that while I was thinking on one another came out and could not get it!!!

It´s the first time I´ve seen Measure for Measure on stage and as I expected Shakespeare is always a joy of pleasure, nobody can match him.His words are full of wit, common sense and truth, they could refer to any country and any time even the present day, as hypocrisy, corruption and sexual entanglements in high places have never gone out of fashion.The story entertaining and engaging, you never feel bored with Shakespeare´s texts, something we can´t say about the other playwrights we have seen this course.As for the cast and the staging, I´m not so enthusiastic, Isabel and the Duke were awful, I had the impression they were having difficulties with the verse, lacking in rhythm and intonation, they sounded artificial. I liked Angelo and the pimp best.Regarding the religious and sexual allusions I´m of the same opinion as Paloma,I found them unnecessary , annoying and totally inappropiate, I can´t understand this trend to be so nagging with Catholicism.

Some of the quotes I liked best:

-Some rise by sin, some by virtue fall.

-What´s mine is yours, and what is yours is mine.

-The miserable have no other medicine, But only hope.

-The jury, passing on the prisoner´s life,May in the sworn twelve have a thief or twoGuiltier than him they try.

-They say, best men are moulded out of faults,And for the most, become much more the better for being a little bad.

-O, it is excellent to have a giant´s strength; but it is tyrannousTo use it like a giant

Hello mates, I liked the play very much, I always feel the same when I see a play by Shakespeare, he is really genial, It's the real life with religion, sex, virtues, vices etc..... It seems that humans have not made any progress in some aspects today we can see the same or similar situation. I don't agree with Paloma, in my opinion all the religions, not only the Christianity are exposed to be ridicule so I dare to say that it is not an important thing and in another hand it would be an interesting discussion to know what the ordinary people think of it. I know it is not your case Paloma, but I am fed up to see the religions hypocrisy all over the world saying things that they don't believe at all, I am sorry if I am so crude but I was very religious many years ago and they got to take away the faith that I had.

If someone has no faith, like Mercedes, I respect the person and his opinion. If you believe there is no God at all, I respect you, but I dislike people should always give their opinion to us. I make myself clear: I have strong opinions about Mormonism or polygamy, for instance, however, have you ever heard me to say something about them? I have strong opinions as far as politic is concerned, have you ever heard me to say something about it? People believes should be respected, some subjects should never be touched. In my opinion it is better not to say anything than to offend other people, mainly if they cannot answer you back, as it happen in films and plays. Were I to say what I think about some people they wouldn’t like, they are always calling other people names and making fun about things which are much more than important for others, because they are sacred. I assure you if Mme. Barden knew what those people think about her, she wouldn’t be pleased at all, for sure. Why do they think they are the only ones with rights, ideals or opinions? Why do they think they are the only ones owning the truth? Why do they think they can go to and fro offending other people feelings? Jesus Christ, who was as intelligent as Shakespeare, if not more, said 2000 years ago: To judge not, that it be not judged, to condemn not that it be not condemned, remember that you will be measured with the very same patron you measure. One more and last thing, religion and priest are not the same. Dogma and clergy behaviour have anything to do. “Do what they say but don’t do what they do”

Paloma, I think you don't understand me at all. The first point is that you assert that I don't believe in God and I have never say that affirmation because I am not atheistic I am agnostic so I respect all the religions and I have studied some of them and always it is the same. You said in your first comment that "all the Spanish directors and actor ridiculed YOU???? What do you think when it is on the contrary? The play is a good play, even some scenes are exagerated, but anyway in my opinion, don't offend God or Catholic, it is only a play you can go to the theatre or not it is your option, and I respect your opinion as you have to respect another different. Measure for measure. I wanted to say that Catholic people (I was a Catholic person) always try to convince me that I am wrong, but for me this behaviour doesn't worry me, I am accustomed. You must know that for you some things are sacred but not for other people. As you said, to judged not, that i be not judged. What do you mean when you said that religion and priest are not the same????? I can't believe you, if you are a Catholic you would believe in the Catholic Church, wouldn't you? I am amazed when people said "I am Catholic but I am not practicing" For me this affirmation is really the worst and I have heard it many times, but anyway I can't understand it but I respect it.

I have read all the comments and they are very interesting. It seems a pity that the directors confuse a Puritan with other forms of too eager, let´s put it that way, religous people! I agree too that the sexual scenes are often unnecessary but the directors always include them! Anyway I enjoyed it as I always do Shakespeare. Well nearly always, do you remember Hamlet???

Well I have been very much interested in your little discussion about religion. Basically, my opinion is that I´m also fed up with people always critizing Catholics, and very careful not to offend Muslims!!! Would you image the Bardem troupe making fun of the beliefs of Mslims? They are AFRAID, no, they wouldn´t, cowards. I agree that some parts could have been omitted, but quite honestly I was not offended, I don´t know, perhaps I´ve forgotten or am too tired now to remebmer. Anyway, I quite liked the play,, what I would like to focus on now is on power: power of the Duke to manage and order and direct the life of othes, this is POWER, babies, and it seem to me to be vey nice, that senastion of telling people what to do and being obeyed, the capacity of doing justice to another human is, must be absolutely amazing, so the Duke interested me tremendously. Isabel was so pathetic that she did not convince me at all, I found it difficult to believe that the Duke would want her as a partner and companion. Angelo was a shadow of a Hamlet, a Iago, etc. in his soliloquy, i think that what you identified as similar was the train of thought and the logic of the argument.Cristina, and Elena thank you for your quotes in English, they are very good.Well, I wonder what we are going to do next Thursday withoout the theatre???? what a month we´ve been to a play every week practically.

What a discussion you are maintaining! Honestly I didn´t notice that they laughed of Catholics... However, you have a point when saying that Muslism is more "respected" in this country that Catholicism, in every single area. I mean, not only are politics frightened by saying something that could offend Muslims but also Spanish actors. Do you remember the demonstration against Israel? Actually what is happening there is horrible; however, there is much disinformation and a kind of contradiction. For instance the fact that one of the demonstrator was Zerolo, taking up a stance in favour of a country where gays are killed, where democracy doesn´t exist...I could feel the dark land of temptation wrapping and clouding the power.I liked Duke´s character but not the actor. The same as Angelo. In my opinion he needed more strength in his performance. His character is also very interesting, as he embodies the clash between honesty and desire, between politic moral and personal interest. Lust and power usually go together.Carmen, that problem has an easy solution. We could go to see "La Cena" at Teatros del Canal!! I´m going for sure...

I found the play very interesting. First of all, I ought to say that the location was fantastic. It was great how they used the ilumination when the scene was suposed to be located in a church or a convent, to make the real archs of the building be seen.

Very seldom do I feel catched by a play, becouse I think that you can be distracted easily in the theatre, specialy if the performance is not good. However overacted some actors were, I couldn´t help paying attention. And the text was great: odd at the very beginning but fantastic in any case, in spite of some actual details (like the motorbike helmeet) that promoted the idea that the story was out of any time.

I am starting to realize that the internal controverse is usually the key for some of Shakespeare's creations. In this case the Angelo's tormented mind was the excuse to discuss about good and evil, death or life, (to be or not to be?). I found particularly inspirative the problem they find in applying the law. Is it more important than the spirit hidden beyond it? Is the rule itself more powerful that the man who created it? Is there any legitimate exception for it use?

And finally, and apart from that, I enjoied a lot, wich is sometimes the best criticism.

I really liked the play, it is a very well adaptation, well played and directed. The staging is very interesting and the place perfect. It was my first time at Teatro de la Abadia.

Maybe the only problem was sometimes it's a bit confused, especially in the beginning.

I didn't like the the actor, who played Angelo’s character, in my opinion, didn’t have a good appearance for his character, he never looked like a virtuous man, and that made his character and his performance less interesting.